Abstract
Against the backdrop of the Spanish housing rights crisis of the past decade, this chapter examines the impact and effectiveness of the outcome of cases of alleged violations of the right to adequate housing lodged with the UNCESCR against Spain as part of the individual complaint mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The authors conclude that, through its active engagement with housing rights issues (in particular evictions), the UNCESCR has made an important contribution to rendering the right to adequate housing effective, especially in situations of vulnerable victims. Given that the Committee is not a judicial body and that its jurisprudence does not constitute judgements, it can be said that its views and recommendations have increased its normative legitimacy within certain segments of Spanish society, such as civil society. However, the various branches of the Spanish government still have to accept the Views and recommendations of the Committee as the outcome of a process of international scrutiny of domestic issues that is authoritative and persuasive, while at the same time leaving the sovereign decision-making power unaffected.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Research for this chapter was concluded on 1 March 2020. Views of the UNCESCR adopted after this date have not been considered.
- 2.
Raustiala 2000, p. 394.
- 3.
Ibid.
- 4.
Simmons 2009, p. 132.
- 5.
Follesdal 2013, pp. 342–343.
- 6.
Simmons 2009, p. 135.
- 7.
Keller and Ulfstein 2012, p. 9.
- 8.
Follesdal 2013, p. 345.
- 9.
Follesdal 2013, p. 345.
- 10.
Follesdal 2013, p. 346 (italics in the original).
- 11.
Liebenberg 2020, pp. 57–58.
- 12.
Madden and Marcuse 2016, p. 9.
- 13.
Anón and Pisarello 2006, pp. 67 and 76.
- 14.
Except the rights to freely join trade unions, the right to strike and the right to education.
- 15.
Third Chapter, Title First, SC.
- 16.
An example was V de Vivienda, which claimed governmental transparency in relation to the access to housing, the creation of a census of empty homes and the creation of a substantial public housing stock.
- 17.
In the course of decades, in contraposition to other European countries, authorities had been directly or indirectly constructing affordable housing, which by law was to lose its protection in 10, 20 or 30 years. As a result, all the public investment on housing has been translated into a mere 2% of affordable housing. Concern “about the lack of social housing” was already expressed by the ICESCR in the 4th Concluding Observations of 7 June 2004 (E/C.12/1/Add.99, para 21).
- 18.
Despite the fact that the Spanish political and administrative system is decentralized, with the Autonomous Communities (regional or semi-federal governments) having competence on housing, other matters affecting housing such as the rental market, mortgages, foreclosures and evictions are central competences. In this regard, it is interesting to note that the central government has lodged appeals before the Constitutional Court in all the emergency housing acts adopted by the Autonomous Communities, alleging lack of competence and suspending their effect. The Constitutional Court in this regard has declared all of these acts partially unconstitutional, adopting a centralized view of the CESCR that cannot be understood without acknowledging the territorial crisis in Spain.
- 19.
In 2012, Act 16/2012 modified the legal regime of SOCIMIS (financial investment vehicles articulated upon real estate rented commodities), exempting such companies from corporation taxes, which prior to the modification amounted to 19%. In this sense, Leilani Farha, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to adequate housing, and Surya Deva, the Chairperson of the Working Group on business and human rights, have written to Spain, among other countries, for “noting that each had facilitated the financialisation of housing in their own countries through preferential tax laws and weak tenant protections among other measures”. For more information, see OHCHR 2019.
- 20.
In 2013, the Act 4/2013 modified, among others, the minimum length of lease agreements, reducing it from 5 to 3 years.
- 21.
For more information, it would be interesting to read Gil 2018.
- 22.
López-Rodríguez and de los Llanos 2019, p. 7.
- 23.
Observatori DESC 2018, p. 3.
- 24.
Madden and Marcuse 2016, p. 26.
- 25.
Among others, the case of Mohamed Aziz v. Catalunyacaixa (C-415/11), the case of Banco Primus, S.A. v. Jesús Gutiérrez García (C-421/14), and Abanca v. others (Joined Cases C-70/17 and C-179/17).
- 26.
In Catalonia (Act 24/2015 and Act 18/2007), the Basque Country (Act 3/2015) and the Balearic Islands (Act 5/2018), housing acts have regulated the expropriation and mandatory assignment of empty homes, the mandatory social rent in case of evictions of vulnerable families, and the obligation of the Administration to relocate families that have suffered evictions without residential alternative, among others.
- 27.
Consejo General del Poder Judicial 2019.
- 28.
The scarce number of States that have ratified the Optional Protocol (9 European States and 24 in total) is a symptom of the reluctance of States to have economic, social and cultural rights breaches monitored by the ICESCR, in particular where in many States these rights could be better described as ‘market rights’.
- 29.
UNGA Res. 63/117.
- 30.
For a discussion of the admissibility of a number of complaints submitted, see Liebenberg 2020, pp. 59–63.
- 31.
Available at https://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/cescr/pages/cescrindex.aspx, accessed 20 May 2020.
- 32.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/D/51/2018 (27-11-2019).
- 33.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/D/51/2018, para 7.3.
- 34.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/D/51/2018, para 7.7.
- 35.
Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 33 (2008), para 19.
- 36.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/3.
- 37.
Communication 2/2014, I.D.G. v. Spain and communication 5/2015, Mohamed Ben Djazia and Naouel Bellili v. Spain.
- 38.
Liebenberg 2010, p. 145.
- 39.
UNCESCR Statement: An Evaluation of the Obligation to Take Steps to the “Maximum of Available Resources” under an Optional Protocol to the Covenant, UN Doc. E/C.12/2007/1.
- 40.
Case 26/2018.
- 41.
Case 37/2018, 49/2018, 59/2018.
- 42.
Case 97/2019, 121/2019.
- 43.
Case 135/2019.
- 44.
S.S.R. v. Spain, UN Doc. E/C.12/66D/51/2018, para 7.1.
- 45.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66D/51/2018, para 7.8.
- 46.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66D/51/2018, para 10.
- 47.
UN Doc. E/C.12/65/D/9/2015.
- 48.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/D/98/2019 and E/C.12/66/D/110/2019.
- 49.
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 4: The right to adequate housing, (1991), para 18.
- 50.
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 7: The right to adequate housing (Article 11(1) of the Covenant): Forced evictions, (1997), paras 13–15.
- 51.
Ibid., para 11.
- 52.
Ibid., para 16.
- 53.
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment nº 20: Non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural rights, 2 July (2009); see also: UN Doc. A/HRC/31/54, Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, and on the right to non-discrimination in this context, (30/12/2015), paras 25–38.
- 54.
UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/33, Human Rights Committee, General Comment nº 33: The Obligations of State Parties under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 25 June 2009, para 19.
- 55.
UN Doc. CAT/C/61/D/614/2014, Committee against Torture, Subakaran R. Thirugnanasampanthar v. Australia, 9 August 2017, para 6.1.
- 56.
General comment No. 7, para 15.
- 57.
In relation to the total amount of communications received by Spain before December 2019. Data obtained through the right of access to public information enshrined in Act 19/2013, of 9 December 2013, on transparency, access to public information and good governance.
- 58.
E/C.12/61/D/5/2015, para 13.4.
- 59.
Ibid., para 17.8.
- 60.
Ibid., para 21.
- 61.
Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; Maribel Viviana López Albán v. Spain, 11 October 2019, para 11.5.
- 62.
López Albán v. Spain, para 11.5.
- 63.
Ben Djazia v. Spain, para 15.5.
- 64.
Ibid., para 17.5.
- 65.
Ibid., para 17.5.
- 66.
Ibid., para 21(d).
- 67.
López Albán v. Spain, paras 9.1–9.2.
- 68.
López Albán v. Spain, para 10.1.
- 69.
López Albán v. Spain, para 17(c).
- 70.
López Albán v. Spain, para 13.2.
- 71.
López Albán v. Spain, para 17(f).
- 72.
E/C.12/66/D/51/2018, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; S.S.R. v. Spain, 11 October 2019, para 6.3.
- 73.
Data obtained through the right of access to public information enshrined in Act 19/2013, of 9 December 2013, on transparency, access to public information and good government.
- 74.
S.S.R. v. Spain, para 7.7.
- 75.
Ibid., para 11.2.
- 76.
Ibid., para 17.
- 77.
PAH website, https://afectadosporlahipoteca.com/, accessed 22 March 2020.
- 78.
Galaup 2018.
- 79.
Defendiendo el Hogar, https://afectadosporlahipoteca.com/2018/12/13/defendiendo-el-hogar/, accessed 22 March 2020.
- 80.
Núñez 2018.
- 81.
Information obtained from the Table of Pending cases of the UNCESCR webpage, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CESCR/Pages/PendingCases.aspx, accessed 22 March 2020.
- 82.
Specifically, CAES (a cooperative law firm that represented Ben Djazia in the case), Cáritas, Aminsity Spain, Observatori DESC and Provivienda.
- 83.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/3.
- 84.
Response by the Director of the Human Rights Office of the Ministry of External Affairs, European Union and Cooperation to the Public Information Petition submitted by the authors on 18 November 2019, 19 December 2019. Translation into English by the authors.
- 85.
Interview by the authors with Javier Rubio at CAES’ office, 25 February 2020.
- 86.
Bou Franch 2019, p. 450.
- 87.
UN Doc. CEDAW/C/58/D/47/2012.
- 88.
Ibid., para 10–11.
- 89.
Supreme Court Decision nº 1263/2018, of 17 July 2018, FJ. 7.3.
- 90.
Ibid., FJ. 7.3.
- 91.
STC 70/2002, 3 April 2002, FJ.7.
- 92.
STC 116/2006, 24 April 2006, FJ.5.
- 93.
ATC 260/2000, 13 November 2000, FJ.2.
- 94.
Protocol nº 11 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, restructuring the control machinery established thereby.
- 95.
Bou Franch 2019, p. 456.
- 96.
STC 32/2019, of 28 February 2019, FJ. 5.
- 97.
Ibid., FJ. 6.
- 98.
In STC 140/2018, 25 December 2018, FJ 6, the Constitutional Court stated that: “Any judge may displace the application of a domestic law to apply preferentially a disposition contained in an international treaty, without said displacement derives in the expulsion of the domestic norm from the system, as it results obvious, but in its mere non-application”. This concept originates from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights case of Almonacid Arellano and others v. Chile, where the Court declared that judges are required to exercise a control between the domestic law and the international treaties, in the cases where the domestic law might render ineffective the international treaty in a particular case.
- 99.
UN Doc.E/C.12/66/3.
- 100.
Despite the fact that Royal-Decree Laws are approved by the Government, they are validated by Congress.
- 101.
Royal-Decree Law 7/2019, Preamble.
- 102.
UN Doc. E/C.12/66/D/37/2018, para 17(f).
- 103.
Ibid., para 17(c).
- 104.
Follesdal 2013, p. 346.
- 105.
OHCHR, Table of Pending cases of the UNCESCR webpage, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CESCR/Pages/PendingCases.aspx, accessed 25 April 2020.
References
Anón M, Pisarello G (2006) The Protection of Social Rights in the Spanish Constitutional System. In: Coomans F (ed) Justiciability of Economic and Social Rights. Experiences from Domestic Systems. Intersentia, Antwerp/Oxford, pp. 67–96
Bou V (2019) El cumplimento en España de las Sentencias y Dictámenes de los órganos de control del cumplimiento de los derechos humanos establecidos en tratados Internacionales. Comentario a la STS núm. 2747/2018 [Compliance in Spain of the judgments and views of the monitoring human rights bodies established by international treaties. Comment to the STS nº 2747/2018] Rev. Boliv. de Derecho 27: 434–457
Coomans F (2018) The UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. In: Oberleitner G (ed) International Human Rights Institutions, Tribunals, and Courts. Springer Nature, Singapore, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4516-5_7-1
Follesdal A (2013) The Legitimacy Deficits of the Human Rights Judiciary: Elements and Implications of a Normative Theory. Theoretical Inquiries in Law 14: 339–360
Galaup L (2018) UN has become the last resort to avoid the eviction of families, https://www.eldiario.es/sociedad/familias-punto-desahuciadas-encuentran-aliado_0_798970643.html, accessed 25 April 2020
Gil J (2018) The nascent real estate bubble, https://ctxt.es/es/20180627/Politica/20442/javier-gil-burbuja-inmobilicaria-decisiones-politicas-partido-popular-cifuentes-comunidad-de-madrid.htm, accessed 25 April 2020
Keller H, Ulfstein G (eds) (2012) UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies – Law and Legitimacy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Liebenberg S (2010) Socio-Economic Rights: Adjudication under a Transformative Constitution. Juta & Co., Cape Town
Liebenberg S (2020) Between Sovereignty and Accountability: The Emerging Jurisprudence of the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights under the Optional Protocol. Human Rights Quarterly 42: 48–84
López-Rodríguez D, de los Llanos M (2019) Evolución reciente del Mercado del alquiler de vivienda en España [Recent evolution of the housing rental market in Spain]. Banco de España, Madrid
Madden D, Marcuse P (2016) In Defense of Housing. Verso, London
Núñez L (2018) Suspension of Richard’s eviction after UNCESCR request for interim measures, https://www.elmundo.es/madrid/2018/04/18/5ad73d4922601dbd068b4586.html, accessed 22 March 2020
OHCHR (2019) States and real estate private equity firms questioned for compliance with human rights, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=24404&LangID=E. Accessed 25 April 2020
Observatori DESC (2018) Els desnonaments del 2008-2017. Una vulneració greu dels drets humans que no s’atura [Evictions 2008-2017. A gross human right violation that does not stop]. https://observatoridesc.org/sites/default/files/informe_odesc_desnonaments_208-2017.pdf Accessed 25 April 2020
Raustiala K (2000) Compliance and Effectiveness in International Regulatory Cooperation. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 32: 387–440
Simmons B (2009) Mobilizing for Human Rights – International Law in Domestic Politics. Cambridge University Press, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Coomans, F., Ruiz Díaz-Reixa, M. (2021). Effectiveness of the ICESCR Complaint Mechanism—An Analysis and Discussion of the Spanish Housing Rights Cases. In: Boost, C., Broderick, A., Coomans, F., Moerland, R. (eds) Myth or Lived Reality. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-447-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-447-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-446-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-447-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)